User talk:Zundark/archive2005

C++
Hi, I'm just wondering why you edited my C++ version of the "Hello World" program. Your version was in itself partially correct. Erehtsti 11:44, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * My version was entirely correct. Your version was wrong, because the return type of  is required to be   (see section 3.6.1 of the C++ standard). --Zundark 12:40, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks for source, I stand corrected. Well, you learn something new everyday Erehtsti 20:23, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Calcutta -> Kolkata name change
Hi there. I noticed you voted in the Naming policy poll to keep the Wikipedia policy of naming an article with the most familiar English name. You may not be aware that another attempt has begun to rename the Calcutta article to Kolkata, which is blatantly not the most common name of the city, whether it's official or not. If you want to vote on the issue you can do so at Talk:Calcutta. Cheers. -- Necrothesp 13:52, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Zürich to Zurich
Zürich has been nominated on Requested moves for a page move to Zurich. Perhapse you might like to express your opinion about this proposed move on talk:Zürich. Philip Baird Shearer 10:14, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Fair Enough
Fair enough with the definition/proof thing - i was bored and needed to edit something slightly more intelligent than my usual football and boxing stuff (having said which - what i put down wasn't nonsensical, it been out of context). But just a question (not trying to be bolshy or sarcastic), but what articles can be written about mathematics?
 * A.K.A.47 14:49, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

Do you mean what articles still need to be written? We seem to have articles on most of the basic things now, but there's a list of articles that are still needed at Requested_articles/mathematics. --Zundark 15:26, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

Macedonians vs. Macedonian Slavs
Dear Zundark, at the moment there is a poll taking place on the Macedonian Slavs talk page to which you could make a significant contribution. Thank you in advance for your participation. Ivica83 13:49, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Bryce Harrington
Hi -- Since you've ben working on the Inkscape article, I thought you might be interested to know that the Bryce Harrington article is currently being voted on for deletion. --Bcrowell 16:13, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

lots of edits, not an admin
Hi - I made a list of users who've been around long enough to have made lots of edits but aren't admins. If you're at all interested in becoming an admin, can you please add an '*' immediately before your name in this list? I've suggested folks nominating someone might want to puruse this list, although there is certainly no guarantee anyone will ever look at it. Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) June 28, 2005 13:47 (UTC)

Bitstream Vera
You said that you had a picture of Bitstream Vera but could not upload it: presumably this is now not the case? Also do you know where I can find a non-compressed version of this font? This machine does not understand  files and whilst I can install new fonts they don't like me installing applications willy-nilly :-( --Phil | Talk July 6, 2005 17:28 (UTC)


 * I uploaded that image a long time ago: Image:BitstreamVera.png. Someone had uploaded a different image over the top of it, but I've reverted it now. I assume you can cope with zip files (Windows XP handles them natively): http://www.zundark.btinternet.co.uk/Vera.zip (if you really need uncompressed, let me know). --Zundark 6 July 2005 18:34 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Color
Can I get you to come to this page? &mdash; Xiong &#29066; talk * 23:36, 2005 August 15 (UTC)

Field
About your edit to Field (mathematics): "not a field, but a Field (But I'm not very happy about this "Field" thing - there must be a better term.)" Care to explain? In this case it should be "Field" in every instance of the term in the article, no? (That would be horrible.) Or are "Field" and "field" different entities? Maths books I've checked use "field". Mathematical terms, BTW, are precisely defined so this "there must be a better term" thing seems strange. But as I'm not a mathematician, I'm willing to learn. RodC 15:13, 27 November 2005 (UTC)


 * "Field" and "field" are different things. The surreal numbers don't form a field, because there are "too many of them" (that is, they form a proper class, not a set). So the article defines "Field" to mean something that is like a field, except that the underlying class is a proper class rather than a set. (This definition is on the line above the one you edited, but I assume you must have missed it.) This is, in my opinion, horrible terminology, because it's a very obscure term (I've never seen it before) that is almost identical to the very well known term "field" and yet has a slightly different meaning. That is why I say there must be a better term. (If there really is no better term, then perhaps the article should avoid using any term for this concept at all, since "Field" is just confusing.) The surreal numbers and the nimbers are the only Fields in the article, so it's certainly not the case that "field" should be capitalized everywhere. --Zundark 16:18, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I had missed that line indeed (I've edited it now for conspicuousness and clarity). I agree with your unhappiness about the term: a sentence starting "Fields are..." becomes unacceptably ambiguous. But if they really are "some times called" that way, the original editor should have some reference to back it. In any case I'd support the removal of this term if there is no better one. RodC 23:46, 27 November 2005 (UTC)